DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 5/18/26 is being considered by the examiner.
Remark
The claims use the phrase “in case” which is interpreted as “if a situation occurs then an action will occur.” Therefore, if the situation does not occur then no specified action will occur.
Thus, if “that the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) inactive state and a UE identity included in the CN paging information matches an identity of the UE allocated
by an upper layer” does not occur then the UE will not perform transition of an RRC state of the UE from the RRC inactive state to an RRC idle state.
Also, if “that the UE has joined at least one multicast broadcast service (MBS) session indicated by a group identity included in the group paging information,” does not occur then the UE will not forward, to the upper layer, the group identity”
Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1, 3, 5-8, 10 and 13-15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Fujishiro (US 2024/0267938 A1) in view of Byun et al. (US 2019/0387570 A1).
Consider claim 1, Fujishiro teaches a method performed by a user terminal (UE) in a wireless communication system (abstract and Fig. 10), the method comprising:
receiving, from a base station, a paging message (Fig. 10, step S3-S4 and paragraph 85-86, the UE receives a paging message in RRC inactive state);
in case that the UE has joined at least one multicast broadcast service (MBS) session indicated by a group identity included in the group paging information forwarding, to the upper layer, the group identity (paragraph 94).
Fujishiro does not teach receiving, from a base station, a paging message including at least one of core network (CN) paging information and group paging information; incase that the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) inactive state and a UE identity included in the CN paging information matches an identity of the UE allocated by an upper layer, performing transition of an RRC state of the UE from the RRC inactive state to an RRC idle state.
Byun further teaches receiving, from a base station, a paging message including at least one of core network (CN) paging information and group paging information (Fig. 7, step S701 and paragraph 92);
In case that the UE is in a radio resource control (RRC) inactive state and a UE identity included in the CN paging information matches an identity of the UE allocated by an upper layer, performing transition of an RRC state of the UE from the RRC inactive state to an RRC idle state (Fig. 7, step S702 and paragraph 93-94 and step S706 and paragraph 97).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify and utilize the above teachings for the purposes of receiving CN bases paging message.
Consider claim 8, claim 8 having similar limitation as claim 1, therefore, claim 8 is rejected for the same reasons claim 1 is rejected.
Consider claims 3 and 10, Fujishiro also teaches in case that the UE is in the RRC inactive state and the UE identity included in the CN paging information matches the identity of the UE allocated by the upper layer, forwarding, to the upper layer, the UE identity (paragraph 94).
Consider claims 5 and 15, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the receiving the paging message comprises: identifying a UE specific discontinuous reception DRX cycle for paging the UE for a multicast session; and receiving the paging message based on the UE specific DRX cycle (paragraph 66).
Consider claims 6 and 13, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the group paging information included in the paging message comprises information indicating a session status change (paragraph 86, notifying session start of the MBS session).
Consider claims 7 and 14, Fujishiro also teaches wherein the group identity is a temporary mobile group identity (TMGI) (paragraph 94).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 9 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JUSTIN YE LEE whose telephone number is (571)272-5258. The examiner can normally be reached 9:30-8:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Kathy Wang-Hurst can be reached at 5712705371. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/JUSTIN Y LEE/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2644 9/16/26
Prosecution Insights